Skip to comments.
Clinton Emissary Said to be Bin Laden Bag Man
NewsMax.com ^
| 10/01/03
| Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
Posted on 10/01/2003 8:43:44 AM PDT by kattracks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
1
posted on
10/01/2003 8:43:46 AM PDT
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
And yet, still.... none dare call it TREASON.
2
posted on
10/01/2003 8:46:01 AM PDT
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: kattracks
What did Bill know, and when did he know it?
How about an independent council?
Where's Nancy Pelosi now?
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRIZE!
3
posted on
10/01/2003 8:46:35 AM PDT
by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it)
To: kattracks
worked at the Clinton State Department as a global emissary for religious tolerance.Only the Clintons would put an Islamic Fundamentalist Extremist in charge of Religious Tolerance.
4
posted on
10/01/2003 8:46:54 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
(<Tag>Something unspeakably clever</Tag>)
To: kattracks
More traitorous acts by the clintoons.
To: kattracks
The timing of this has nothng at all to do with the CIA scandal.
6
posted on
10/01/2003 8:47:11 AM PDT
by
js1138
To: kattracks
ugly bump
clinton didn't know, did he? /bs off
To: kattracks
A story like this will pass through the collective conscience of the entire liberal news media without a ripple, while they continue to bang the non-story regarding Wilson as though it were truly tidal.
Sickening. Typical and sickening. Rat b*stards.
To: kattracks
Ashcroft crusades to keep us safe from bong merchants while feigning blindness to the Clintons' crimes.
To: Dead Corpse
"
And yet, still.... none dare call it TREASON."
We, [you and I], do!
10
posted on
10/01/2003 8:52:13 AM PDT
by
G.Mason
(Lessons of life need not be fatal)
To: kattracks
Bill & Hill should be tried for TREASON, convicted, and EXECUTED.
I wonder if B & H could be sued to complicit negligence.
11
posted on
10/01/2003 8:53:11 AM PDT
by
appalachian_dweller
(If we accept responsibility for our own actions, we are indeed worthy of our freedom. – Bill Whittle)
To: mountaineer; Miss Marple; Dog
Oh hum. Wanna bet this will never make it into the mainstream press?
12
posted on
10/01/2003 8:57:15 AM PDT
by
Iowa Granny
(Conservative women LIKE men!)
To: G.Mason
Unless one of us is Ashcroft in disguise, there ain't much we can do other than b!tch about it.
Someone needs to step up and do their job.
13
posted on
10/01/2003 8:57:37 AM PDT
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: kattracks
Mrs. Clinton apparently knew that Alamoudi's donation could be politically problematic - her staff reported the contribution on Federal Election Commission records as coming from "the American Museum Council." I remember this contribution was reported here at FR during Hillary's senate campaign. It may have been the NY Post or some such outlet that reported it. This contribution and the Suha Arafat kiss were often referred to here, but the media, naturally, buried these anti-Jewish connections under the rug and she went on to be elected.
His arrest as a bin Ladin agent, of course, is a new twist to the case. But the chances that the major media will report it are, to say the least, somewhere around zero.
14
posted on
10/01/2003 8:57:55 AM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: Husker8877
How do you keep a story you dont want seen out of sight? You put a "bigger" story in front of it. Even if the story is contrived it still serves its purpose.
Im not saying that's what is going on here, but it is something to consider.
These people know how to play the PR game; they have been doing it for years. This situation matches the pattern.
15
posted on
10/01/2003 8:58:25 AM PDT
by
myself6
(Unionize IT?! "I will stop the motor of the world" - John Galt)
To: Mia T
You've probably seen this, but just in case...
16
posted on
10/01/2003 9:03:08 AM PDT
by
jla
(http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com)
To: myself6; Miss Marple; piasa; BOBTHENAILER; nopardons; Liz; mewzilla; Phsstpok
You are right on target.
The lunatic lefties have had the non story of Wilson's wife being compromised on their back burners since July.
They quickly released this non story this past weekend as they knew this damaging data would be coming out.
Their mediot buddies have cooperated to bury the real story with the non story/lies. This was one of the oldest KGB tricks when the USSR was still around.
17
posted on
10/01/2003 9:03:38 AM PDT
by
Grampa Dave
(May our brave warriors kill all of the Islamokazis/facists/nazis to prevent future 9/11's.)
To: Dead Corpse
Can anybody here guess who the American Muslim Alliance
endorsed for President in 2000? Don't click the link until you've at least given one try at guessing, but noting that there are many reasons why Ashcroft's Justice Department isn't that interested in investigating this stuff may give you a hint.
18
posted on
10/01/2003 9:03:43 AM PDT
by
drjimmy
To: js1138
You think the capture of Alamoud was planned just to counter the CIA thing?
To: js1138
The timing of this has nothng at all to do with the CIA scandal.I would say it this way:
The timing of the CIA scandal has nothing at all to do with this.
20
posted on
10/01/2003 9:04:18 AM PDT
by
StriperSniper
(The slippery slope is getting steeper.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson